论文部分内容阅读
修理与再造的区分问题是专利权用尽原则具体适用中的争议焦点之一,二者的根本区别在于修理的本质是为了维持原有产品的寿命,因而该行为具有正当性;然而再造产生和制造的是一个新的专利产品,因此损害了专利权人的利益,故受到专利法的禁止。文章认为目前司法实践中尚无一套稳定和可操作的区分专利产品修理与再造的标准。为正确合理地区分修理与再造、平衡专利权人和所有权人的利益,应从专利权用尽制度的创设宗旨、维护市场竞争和社会公共利益等方面综合考量这个问题。
The distinction between repair and remanufacturing is one of the focuses of controversy in the specific application of the principle of exhaustion of patent rights. The fundamental difference between the two is that the essence of repair is to maintain the life span of the original product and therefore the act is justified. However, Made a new patented product, thus undermining the interests of the patentee, it is prohibited by the patent law. The article holds that there is not a set of stable and operable standards for judging the repairing and rebuilding of patented products in current judicial practice. In order to correctly and reasonably distinguish between repairs and reengineering and to balance the interests of the patentee and the owner, we should consider this issue comprehensively in terms of the creation of the patent exhaustion system, the maintenance of market competition and public interests.